you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I seriously think we need to ask serious questions if we're able to shift people point to point further, faster by first going 4 miles towards space for a fraction of the price of moving more people at once on an electrified railway stopping at multiple destinations, picking up and dropping off along the way.

Something cannot be right. How can they not compete and be profitable? What am I missing?

Outside of major cities in the UK trains tickets are ludicrously priced.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Planes don't have to maintain the sky, but trains need to maintain the rails.

    Essentially any costs that can be externalized & paid by the public with air travel have been, like maintaining airports, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Airlines pay landing fees though, they definitely aren't using the airport for free.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    Yeah, but from A to B the plane does not use man made infrastructure and planes are for longer journeys than typical trains. Two airports cost a lot less than the constant maintenance of hundreds of miles of tracks, signaling, crossings, bridges and tunnels, forest overgrowth etc. plus the road infrastructure needed to maintain all parts of the train track corridor, even if it's a dirt road, it needs minimum maintenance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Well. In the UK the rails and infrastructure used to be privately owned. But it turned out a private company couldn't be trusted with that level of safety within their remit. So it returned to government control quite some tine ago.

    The train companies are private though. Well except for a handful that failed to meet requirements.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the rails and infrastructure used to be privately owned. But it turned out a private company couldn’t be trusted with that level of safety within their remit

    Google Ladbroke Grove and Hatfield rail crashes if you wanna know more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Oh I remember why. I was considering including links to some of the causes of the end of railtrack. But I thought it shouldn't really come as a surprise to those already here that private companies and safety are seldom bedfellows.

  • source
  • parent